DOCSLIB.ORG

In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin Milwaukee Division

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin Milwaukee Division IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION ERIC O’KEEFE, and WISCONSIN CLUB FOR GROWTH, INC., Plaintiffs, Civil Case No. ________________ v. FRANCIS SCHMITZ, in his official and personal capacities, JOHN CHISHOLM, in his official and personal capacities, BRUCE LANDGRAF, in his official and personal capacities, COMPLAINT DAVID ROBLES, in his official and personal capacities, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED DEAN NICKEL, in his official and personal capacities, and GREGORY PETERSON, in his official capacity, Defendants. Now Come the above-named plaintiffs, Eric O’Keefe (“O’Keefe”) and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc., (“WCFG”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by and through their attorneys, and make their Complaint against Defendants Francis Schmitz (“Schmitz”), John Chisholm (“Chisholm”), Bruce Landgraf (“Landgraf”), David Robles (“Robles”), and Dean Nickel (“Nickel”), in their respective official and personal capacities (collectively, “Defendants”), and against Gregory Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 1 of 76 Document 1 Peterson (“Peterson”), in his official capacity only.1 This action arises under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. § 1983), and the doctrine recognized in Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). Plaintiffs allege and state as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. 1 The defined term “Defendants,” as used in this Complaint, does not include Gregory Peterson, who is named only in the official capacity of his office and is referred to separately in allegations involving the official capacity of his office. 2 Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 2 of 76 Document 1 2. 3. These extraordinary circumstances call for extraordinary action from the federal judiciary. Federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court, have affirmed the principle that “investigations, whether on a federal or state level, are capable of encroaching upon the constitutional liberties of individuals” and that “[i]t is particularly important that the exercise of the power of compulsory process be carefully circumscribed when the investigative process tends to impinge upon such highly sensitive areas as freedom of speech or press, freedom of political association, and freedom of communication of ideas . .” Sweezy v. New Hampshire by Wyman, 354 U.S. 234, 245 (1957). The Court should reaffirm these principles and issue preliminary and permanent injunctions ending the investigation and award damages to O’Keefe and WCFG in an amount to be determined at trial. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This action arises under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983; and the doctrine recognized in Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908). Jurisdiction of the Court is conferred by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343(a)(3) and (4). 5. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin is a proper federal venue for this action because all the defendants are residents of Wisconsin pursuant to 28 3 Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 3 of 76 Document 1 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1). In addition, pursuant to Section 1391(b)(2), a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in Milwaukee County. Venue in the Milwaukee Division is appropriate because the events in question have their “greatest nexus” to the counties in that division. See In re General Order Regarding Assignment of Cases to the United States District Judge Designated to Hold Court in Green Bay, Wisconsin (E.D. Wis. Jan. 1, 2005). PARTIES 6. Plaintiff Eric O’Keefe is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Iowa County, Wisconsin. O’Keefe is a veteran volunteer political activist with local and national activities, and he engages in First Amendment-protected political speech and associational activities in Wisconsin and nationwide, including through several independent organizations. O’Keefe is a director of WCFG, 7. Plaintiff WCFG is a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization that promotes free- market ideas and policies. It does this through public communications and its expressive associations with other groups promoting conservative policies. All of its public communications constitute “issue” advocacy—that is, none expressly urge the election or defeat of any candidate for office—and WCFG only associates and donates money to other groups that similarly engage in issue advocacy. 8. Defendants’ investigation, 4 Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 4 of 76 Document 1 violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. 9. On information and belief, Defendant Francis Schmitz is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Waukesha County, Wisconsin. At all times material to this Complaint, Schmitz was and is acting under color of law. 10. On information and belief, Defendant John Chisholm is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, and is the District Attorney of that county. In Wisconsin, District Attorney is a partisan position, and Chisholm ran for his post as a Democratic Party candidate and has strong ties with members of that Party in Milwaukee, including with Mayor Tom Barrett, who ran for governor twice against Scott Walker. At all times material to this Complaint, Chisholm was and is acting under color of law. 11. On information and belief, Defendant Bruce Landgraf is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, and is employed as an Assistant District Attorney in the Milwaukee County Attorney’s Office. On information and belief, Landgraf prosecutes cases for that Office’s Public Integrity Unit At all times material to this Complaint, Landgraf was and is acting under color of law. 5 Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 5 of 76 Document 1 12. On information and belief, David Robles is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Milwaukee County and is employed as an Assistant District Attorney in the Milwaukee County Attorney’s Office. As a member of that Office’s Public Integrity Unit, At all times material to this Complaint, Robles was and is acting under color of law. 13. On information and belief, Dean Nickel is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Dane County, Wisconsin. Defendant Dean Nickel worked under Peggy Lautenschlager, the former Attorney General of Wisconsin from 2003 to 2007 and member of the Democratic Party, as head of the Wisconsin Department of Justice Public Integrity Unit and did not remain in that high-level position after her tenure ended. At all times material to this Complaint, Nickel was and is acting under color of law. 14. On information and belief, Gregory Peterson is an individual who resides at his permanent address in Eau Claire County, Wisconsin, and is a retired Appeals Court Judge. Peterson has been appointed as John Doe “Judge” and is responsible for administering the most recent John Doe proceeding in this investigation. Peterson is a Defendant in this matter in his official capacity only, and Plaintiffs are not seeking money damages from him. An injunction against Peterson is necessary 6 Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 6 of 76 Document 1 to provide Plaintiffs adequate relief in this lawsuit, At all times material to this Complaint, Peterson was and is acting under color of law. FACTS I. Background 15. The investigation at issue in this Complaint is taking place against the backdrop of the most tumultuous political events in Wisconsin in generations—perhaps in history. 16. On November 2, 2010, candidates of the Republican Party won control of all branches of the Wisconsin government for the first time since 1998. 17. Contributing to this success was the growing influence of conservative independent social welfare organizations, . These social welfare organizations published political speech, in media, including television and radio, on issues related to their organizational purposes. Around the time of the 2010 Wisconsin gubernatorial race, independent interest groups spent, according to the best estimates, a combined $37.4 million, largely for communications criticizing positions taken by the candidates. 18. Many with left-leaning views have opposed the involvement of independent interest groups like WCFG in election speech. This opposition escalated considerably after the Supreme Court decided Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310, in January 2010, which struck down regulations barring corporations from making independent express advocacy expenditures in elections as violative of the First Amendment. The Court explained that the “right of citizens to inquire, to hear, to speak, and to use information to reach consensus is a precondition to enlightened self-government and a necessary means to protect it,” and that the “First Amendment has its fullest and most urgent application to speech uttered 7 Case 2:14-cv-00139 Filed 02/10/14 Page 7 of 76 Document 1 during a campaign for political office.” 558 U.S. at 339 (internal quotation marks omitted). Demonstrating the consternation surrounding that decision among many affiliated with the Democratic Party, the President of the United States chastised members of the Supreme Court in attendance at that year’s State of the Union Address over the decision. This tactic was unprecedented, as observers noted at the time. 19. Around this time, left-leaning advocates began to theorize and propose that campaign finance theories such as “coordination” could be redefined and diverted from their traditional scope to undermine Citizens United and offer an alternative route to preventing independent organizations from participating in elections. Another campaign finance concept recommended for redefinition was the distinction between “issue” advocacy and “express” advocacy. Left-leaning advocates have also spent considerable time and efforts theorizing of ways to expose the names of donors to social welfare organizations in order to allow them to become the targets of reprisals.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Case 15-10635-MFW Doc 154 Filed 04/22/15 Page 1 of 81 Case 15-10635-MFW Doc 154 Filed 04/22/15 Page 2 of 81 Karmaloop, Inc
    Case 15-10635-MFW Doc 154 Filed 04/22/15 Page 1 of 81 Case 15-10635-MFW Doc 154 Filed 04/22/15 Page 2 of 81 Karmaloop, Inc. - U.S. Mail Case 15-10635-MFW Doc 154 Filed 04/22/15 Page 3 of 81 Served 4/21/2015 00NOTHING 10.DEEP 123 SNAPBACKS 300 NORTH END AVE 19226 70TH AVENUE SOUTH 577 BUCKINGHAM WAY UNIT 3E KENT, WA 98032 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94132-1904 NEW YORK, NY 10282 191 UNLIMITED 1POINT 1POINT 634 GROVE AVE 222 MERCHANDISE MART PLAZA 33 MONTCLAIR AVE EDISON, NJ 08820 SUITE 1212 SUITE 1 CHICAGO, IL 60654 MONTCLAIR, NJ 07042 1ST CLASS 2 FEET PRODUCTIONS 24/7 REAL MEDIA US, INC. 3913 8TH AVE PO BOX 223636 PO BOX 200020 BROOKLYN, NY 11232 PITTSBURGH, PA 15251-2636 PITTSBURGH, PA 15251-0020 40 OZ 54 RECKLESS 7TH LETTER ATTN: CREDIT DEPT. 6380 WILSHIRE BLVD DBA THE SEVENTH LETTER 501 10TH AVENUE, 7TH FLOOR SUITE 1106 346 N FAIRFAX AVE. NEW YORK, NY 10018 LOS ANGELES, CA 90046 LOS ANGELES, CA 90036 8 OTHER REASONS A.J. MORGAN A1 LLC, A NEVIS LLC 908 SOUTH HOBART BLVD #310 850 S. BROADWAY UNIT 202-203 JOSEPH CIMINO, MANAGER LOS ANGELES, CA 90006 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 8 SELBOURNE AVE RICHMOND, NELSON 7020 NEW ZEALAND AARON LOCKLEAR ABDULLAH ABDUL-AZIM ABOY LLC 7981 RENNERT RD. 226 WEST 152ND STREET, APT 4A C/O THE DRUKER COMPANY SHANNON, NC 28386 NEW YORK, NY 10039 50 FEDERAL STREET, SUITE 1000 BOSTON, MA 02110 ABOY, LLC ABSURD NEW YORK ACCOUTREMENTS C/O TDC HOLDING CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • The Third Branch, Summer 2003
    Vol 11 No 3 H I G H L I G H T S Summer 2 Two state judges are finalists for 8Awards 2003 federal judgeship 11 People 5 Retirements 16 DCA returns from Persian Gulf 7 Building a better family court 22 Online juror qualification to be explored Appellate courts welcome new members Justice Patience Drake Roggensack vacancy created by the election of Judge Patience D. The Wisconsin Supreme Court welcomed Justice Patience Roggensack to the Supreme Court. Higginbotham will need D. “Pat” Roggensack on August 1. Roggensack won a 10- to seek election to a full, six-year term in April 2005. year term on the state’s high court in the April election. Higginbotham made a statewide name for himself in last Prior to joining the Supreme Court, Roggensack spent spring’s race for the open seat on the Wisconsin Supreme seven years on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals. She is the Court. Although he did not make it through the primary (he first judge from the Court of Appeals, which was created in received approximately 77,000 votes to Chief Judge Edward 1978, to serve on the R. Brunner’s 89,000 and now-Justice Patience D. a publication of the Wisconsin Judiciary a publication of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Roggensack’s 108,000), he Moving over from the successfully raised his Court of Appeals with the profile and earned some new justice is Judicial glowing endorsements, Assistant Patti Gotrik. including one from the Roggensack’s law clerk will Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, be Atty. Lisa Mazzie, who which called him “bright, most recently worked as an thoughtful, and fair-minded.” investigator for the Office of In his nine years on the Lawyer Regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Original Jurisdiction Case Between The
    PROPOSED ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CASE BETWEEN THE PLAINTIFF STATES REGARDING EVIDENCE OF MASSIVE ELECTION FRAUD AND A CRIMINAL EFFORT TO COVER UP THAT FRAUD IN NUMEROUS DEFENDANT STATES PURPOSE: This outline is designed as an advisory report based on existing massive evidence of election misdeeds performed by numerous actors at the national, state and local levels, with the clear intent to manipulate the outcome of the 2020 elections, specifically, but not limited to, the defendant states and actors recommended below. The objective is as follows, 1) Appeal directly to the US Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction pertaining to constitutional cases involving two or more states; 2) Declaring proper legal standing as a result of all 50 states and 332 million Citizens being subject to the fraudulent results of elections in the defendant states; 3) To bring evidence to the highest court in the land, of massive and highly coordinated election tampering in numerous states, to prevent the United States from breaking apart as a direct result of the actions taken unlawfully in the defendant states; 4) Provide for an immediate legal and constitutional solution to the most fraudulent election cycle in USA history, before American citizens lose all faith and trust in our Republican forms of government and attempt to resolve this constitutional crisis themselves; PROPOSED PLAINTIFFS STATE OF TEXAS, ATTORNEY GENERAL KEN PAXTON STATE OF ALABAMA, ATTORNEY GENERAL STEVE MARSHALL STATE OF ARKANSAS, ATTORNEY GENERAL LESLIE RUTLEDGE STATE OF FLORIDA,
    [Show full text]
  • Official Ballot Partisan Office and Referendum November 6, 2018
    Official Ballot Partisan Office and Referendum November 6, 2018 Notice to Voters: If you are voting on Election Day, your ballot must be initialed by two election inspectors. If you are voting absentee, your ballot must be initialed by the municipal clerk or deputy clerk. Your ballot may not be counted without initials. (See end of ballot for initials.) Instructions to Voters Statewide (Cont.) County (Cont.) If you make a mistake on your ballot or State Treasurer Coroner have a question, ask an election Vote for 1 Vote for 1 inspector for help. (Absentee voters: Travis Hartwig Cindy Giese Contact your municipal clerk.) (Republican) (Republican) Sarah Godlewski To vote for a name on the ballot, make write-in: ________________________ an "X" or other mark in the square next (Democratic) to the name like this: T. Andrew Zuelke Clerk of Circuit Court To vote for a name that is not on the (Constitution) Vote for 1 ballot, write the name on the line marked Roselle M. Schlosser write-in: ________________________ "write-in". (Republican) Statewide Congressional write-in: ________________________ You may mark only one square for United States Senator the office of Governor/ Lieutenant Vote for 1 Governor. A vote for only Lieutenant Leah Vukmir Referendum Governor will not be counted. (Republican) To vote in favor of a question, make Governor / Tammy Baldwin an "X" in the square next to "Yes" Lieutenant Governor (Democratic) like this: . To vote against a Vote for 1 question, make an "X" in the square write-in: ________________________ Scott Walker / next to "No" like this: . Rebecca Kleefisch Representative in Congress County (Republican) District 3 QUESTION 1: "I support the County Tony Evers / Vote for 1 in borrowing $4,000,000 for the purpose of restoring county roads Mandela Barnes Steve Toft and maintenance to a thirty (30) (Democratic) (Republican) year pavement life cycle." Phillip Anderson / Ron Kind Patrick Baird (Democratic) (Libertarian) YES write-in: ________________________ Michael J.
    [Show full text]
  • The First Goodbye a Community Education It Easy,’” He Said
    SELL YOUR HOME EASIER! Local, Experienced & Trusted Get the RIGHT Real Estate Advice... Get Geiger JASON GEIGER It’s your paper! (608) 277-2167 Friday, October 10, 2014 • Vol. 1, No. 8 • Fitchburg, WI • ConnectFitchburg.com • $1 Office Next to Great Dane - Fitchburg GeigerRealtors.com adno=368693-01 Inside Study up on elections and the city budget plans Page 5 Schools Find out what’s in the Oregon referendum Page 14 Sports Network reaches across diverse groups to share ideas, resources SAMANTHA CHRISTIAN people in Fitchburg, 17.2 percent were Unified Newspaper Group Hispanic or Latino, 10.4 percent black or African American and 4.9 percent Asian. Fitchburg is a growing city with more Those numbers are nearly double what the ethnic, economic and religious diversity averages were for the state of Wisconsin, than most of Wisconsin. at 5.9, 6.3 and 2.3 percent, respectively. Rather than allowing these perceived Haslanger saw the city’s increasing differences to divide the community, an diversity and geography as a way for area unlikely pairing of faith leaders and city churches to reach out and cross some of officials created a dialogue that has taken the perceived racial, economic and ethnic on a life of its own. boundaries. Meanwhile, Pfaff was seeking VAHS girls golf From initiating the Good Neighbors Per- ways to keep various parts of Fitchburg – makes state sonal Essentials Pantry and coordinating particularly the developing northern Fish volunteer efforts at the senior center and Hatchery Road corridor and urban core – Page 18 area schools to acting as a support system connected as it became more diverse.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the States 2010: HOW the RECESSION MIGHT CHANGE
    STATE OF THE STATES 2010 HOW THE RECESSION MIGHT CHANGE STATES FEBRUARY 2010 The Pew Center on the States is a division of The Pew Charitable Trusts that identifies and advances effective solutions to critical issues facing states. Pew is a nonprofit organization that applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public and stimulate civic life. PEW CENTER ON THE STATES Susan K. Urahn, managing director ProJect Team: Editors Graphics and Design Diane Fancher Danny Dougherty Lori Grange Design and Publications Barbara Rosewicz Evan Potler Writers Carla Uriona Stephen C. Fehr Pamela M. Prah Christine Vestal ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In addition to those listed above, we would like to recognize and thank Pew colleagues who assisted in this publication. Planning and conception: Katherine Barrett, Doug Chapin, Richard Greene, Kil Huh, Michele Mariani Vaughn, Andrew McDonald and Albert Wat. Photo research: Daniel C. Vock. Reporting assistance: David Harrison. Editorial research: Sarah Emmans, Tiffany Ward and Katharine Zambon. Fact-checking: Nancy Augustine, Megan Cotten, Samuel Derheimer, Melissa Maynard, Matt McKillop, Morgan Shaw and Liz Snyder. Communications: Andrew McDonald and Sarah Holt. Dissemination: Julia Hoppock, Jennifer Peltak, Frederick Schecker and Cari Sutton. We thank the Pew Center on the States project teams for their contributions. We also thank Marcia Kramer of Kramer Editing Services for her editorial assistance. For additional information on Pew and the Center on the States, please visit www.pewcenteronthestates.org. This report is intended for educational and informational purposes. References to specific policy makers or companies have been included solely to advance these purposes and do not constitute an endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by The Pew Charitable Trusts.
    [Show full text]
  • BMB40 Oct04.Pub
    Big Money Bulletin Truth in campaigning takes one on the chin On September 1, the state Elections Board rejected by one vote the proposed Inside truth-in-campaigning rule written by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, once again refusing to close the gaping loophole in Wisconsin’s campaign Page 2 finance laws allowing special interest campaign ads to escape disclosure WDC outs outsourcing deal requirements and campaign contribution limits. Despite overwhelming public Insiders have $9-$1 edge support for campaign finance disclosure as evidenced by the 2000 referendum where 90 percent of voters supported full and prompt disclosure of all election- Page 3 related activities, the Elections Board voted down the disclosure rule 5-4. Bogus polls Page 4 The deciding vote against the rule was cast by Martha Love, the Democratic A People’s Legislature Party of Wisconsin's appointee to the board. Love previously had voted three times to move forward with the rulemaking – once in January and two more times in March – before reversing course on the vote for final approval. Another Democratic appointee who had appeared to be wavering in his support of the disclosure rule, the Assembly Democratic leader’s designee Carl Holborn, ultimately voted in favor of the rule. The Democracy Campaign sent letters calling for a new vote on the proposed truth-in-campaigning rule requiring full disclosure of special interest campaign ads to Governor Jim Doyle, the state chair of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and the flip-flopping party appointee to the state Elections Board who cast the key vote rejecting the disclosure rule.
    [Show full text]
  • We Call Upon All Elected Leaders And
    “We call upon all elected leaders and elections officials at every level of government to recommit to our core democratic principles, to look within and consider what they themselves can do in this critical hour to uphold the best in our nation’s values.” – Faith leaders’ statement on integrity, safety and fairness in the 2020 U.S Election, Oct. 12, 2020 Send Faith Leaders' Letter on Elections to Secretary of State Please contact your secretary of state and urge her/him to ensure the integrity of the upcoming elections. The Lawyers and Collars voting rights education and protection program has prioritized this messaging for nine states: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin. You may find a sample message and contact information below. Background As Election Day 2020 approaches, the country is facing many challenges and with it growing stress on state and county election officials. Boards of Elections will have to process many more absentee ballots than in past elections because of the pandemic. Older persons who usually make up a significant percentage of poll workers may not be working this year because they are more susceptible to the virus, leading to thinner staffing. A contentious election may also lead to a record turnout. Add to those factors: calls for people to ”protect” election sites with a show of force and persistent disinformation about election “fraud” and a “rigged election.” The Sisters of Mercy signed onto a faith leaders’ statement on integrity, safety and fairness in the 2020 U.S Election that calls “for integrity in the processes that shape our systems of governance and form the basis of our shared wellbeing.” It is important to let your secretary of state know that you expect her/him to adhere to the highest standards to ensure that voters have correct information, that there is no intimidation of voters outside polling places and that all valid ballots are counted, no matter how long it takes.
    [Show full text]
  • Milwaukee Mayor Throws Hat in Ring with Upcoming Recall Election of Governor by DANIEL BICE, LARRY SANDLER and PATRICK MARLEY MILWAUKEE, Wis
    Saturday, March 31, 2012 Milwaukee mayor throws hat in ring with upcoming recall election of governor By DANIEL BICE, LARRY SANDLER and PATRICK MARLEY MILWAUKEE, Wis. — It took a little while, but Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett has finally decided whether to run in the upcoming recall election. He’s in. In a Friday afternoon e-mail to supporters, Barrett, who has twice run unsuccessfully for governor, announced that he will be making a third bid for the state’s highest office as part of the recall election of Gov. Scott Walker. “We need to bring our state back,” Barrett wrote in the note. “Wisconsin needs a governor who is focused on jobs, not ideology; a leader committed to bringing our state together and healing political wounds, not pitting people against each other and catering to the special interests. “This is the governor I will be for the people of Wisconsin.” Barrett’s candidacy will have an immediate impact. “His candidacy is a game-changer,” said Jim Palmer, head of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, which has yet to endorse a candidate. “The candidates who have been in the race so far have not drawn a lot of excitement.” The mayor’s decision to run sets up a possible rematch of the 2010 gubernatorial election. In that race, Walker, a Wauwatosa Republican, defeated the Democratic mayor by 52 percent-47 percent. Barrett’s much-anticipated announcement came just hours after state elections officials officially ordered the recall contest, making Walker the third governor in the nation to face a recall and Rebecca Kleefisch the first lieutenant governor to face one.
    [Show full text]
  • EAST WASHINGTON AVENUE Old East Side Master Plan
    EAST WASHINGTON AVENUE Old East Side Master Plan Better Urban Infill Development Program Dane County, Wisconsin August 2000 OLD EAST SIDE MASTER PLAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Design Team Tim Griffin Ruth Koontz Susan J.M. Bauman, Mayor Mike Lamb Mark A. Olinger, Director, Dept. of Planning and Development Bradley J. Murphy, Director, Planning Unit Peter Musty Rich McLaughlin Bill Smith Project Staff Lucy Thompson Archie Nicolette, Planner II – Project Manager Bill Lanier, Planning Technician Debora Morgan, Program Assistant III Workshop Space Donated by the Salvation Army City Resource Staff Team East Washington Avenue BUILD Project was funded by the Dan McCormick, Traffic Engineering Rob Phillips, Engineering Dane County Better Urban Infill Development (BUILD) Program. BUILD provides planning assistance to Dane County Judy P. Olson, Assistant to Mayor communities and the city of Madison for redevelopment and infill development planning projects. BUILD is a component of East Washington BUILD Advisory Committee Ald. Barbara Vedder, District 2 – Chair the Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk’s Design Dane!: Susan Agee, Emerson East Creating a Diverse Environment through Sensible, Intelligent Growth Now. Ken Balkin, Ella’s Deli & Ice Cream Parlor Barbara Foley, Neighborhood Committee Lou Host-Jablonski, Urban Design Commission Representative prepared by David Leucinger, Schenk-Atwood BIKO ASSOCIATES, INC./TOWN PLANNING COLLABORATIVE Ald. Kent Palmer, District 15 joint venture Greg Rice, Madison East Shopping Center © 2000 – City of Madison, Wisconsin OLD EAST SIDE MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE . .ii Pedestrians and Bicycles . .26 Specific Areas . .26 INTRODUCTION Union Corners . .26 The BUILD Program . .1 Madison East Neighborhood Retail Area . .27 The Capital City Gateway .
    [Show full text]
  • Have You Heard?
    HAVE YOU HEARD? Philip S. Habermann ('47) Todd J. Mitchell ('68), a partner Christopher Hexter ('72) has received the 1997 Goldberg Award in the Milwaukee based firm of been elected chair of the American from the State Bar of Wisconsin. The Meissner Tierney Fisher & Nichols, Bar Association's Developing Labor Award recognizes lifetime contribu- has opened a branch office for the Law Commission. Hexter practices in tions to the legal profession and pub- firm in Hartland, Wisconsin. St. Louis. lic in this state. Habermann also won Paul J. Cherner ('68), a senior Bradford Dewan ('72) has the 1994 UW Law School partner with Michael, Best and joined the San Francisco office of Distinguished Service Award. Friedrich's Chicago office, has been [effer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro, David Beckwith ('52), senior elected Chairman of the Schwab where he will concentrate in estate partner with Foley & Lardner, has Rehabilitation Hospital and Care planning. Dewan previously practiced been honored by the Wisconsin Network's Board of Directors. in Oaldand, California. Alumni Association with its 1997 Paul Eggert ('68) has been Bruce Kerr ('72) has been Distinguished Alumni Award for con- appointed Regional Director for the named Contracts Manager- tributions to the legal profession and National Labor Relations Board Technology Licensing & Commercial to the university. office in Seattle, Washington. He Transactions for Sun Microsystems A. Glenn Epps ('56) has been moves from the NLRB office in Computer Company in Mountain honored by the Flint, Michigan, Oaldand, California, and has been View, California. Common Council for his efforts to with the agency since graduation. Francis L.
    [Show full text]
  • Marquette Law School Poll, April Instrument
    Marquette Law School Poll April 26-29, 2012 S1. May I please speak with the (male/female) adult member of your household, currently at home, age 18 or older , with the most recent birthday? 1 Correct household member on phone (CONTINUE) 2 Will put correct member of household on phone (RE-READ INTRO AND CONTINUE WITH S2.) 3 No household member age 18 or over is currently available (PLACE HOUSEHOLD INTO CALLBACK) 4 No one in household age 18 or older (TERMINATE) S2. Record Gender: (DO NOT ASK. RECORD ONLY ONE RESPONSE) 1 Male 2 Female S3a. Do you currently live in Wisconsin? 1 Yes 2 No (TERMINATE) S3b. In what county in Wisconsin do you live? ___________________________________ (If respondent lives in Milwaukee County or County is Don' tknow/Other, continue to S4.) S4. Do you currently live within Milwaukee city limits? (RECORD ONE ANSWER) 1 Yes (Milwaukee City quota group) 2 No (Milwaukee DMA quota group) S5. Some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you registered to vote in the precinct or ward where you now live, or aren't you? 1 Yes, Registered to Vote (SKIP TO Q.1) 2 No, Not Registered to Vote (ASK S6) (DO NOT READ) 9 No Answer/Don't Know/Refused (ASK S6) S6. Do you plan to register to vote, or is there a chance that you may not register? 1 Plan to Register 2 Chance May Not Register (TERMINATE) (DO NOT READ) 9 Don’t know/Refused (TERMINATE) Q1. Some people seem to follow what's going on in politics most of the time, whether there's an election going on or not.
    [Show full text]